Pages

Saturday, 17 December 2011

Jacobs Photos

The BFRO suggests that the R Jacobs photos might be a young Sasquatch. The photo's can be seen here. The main reason why the BFRO and others suggest this might be a Sasquatch is due to the limb proportions. In their calculations the limb proportions do not match those of a bear, and appear to be similar to a primate. Limb proportions can only be estimated because the photo quality is not sufficient to show anatomical landmarks required to make these calculations. Although this photo does not seem to be typical of a black bear, limbs do seem longer than that of a black bear.

Here is the reasons why this is likely not a Sasquatch:

Walks/stands on four legs - Sasquatch are bipedal

Size - Smaller than 5 feet tall (reference), probably about 100-150 lbs (my own guess), Sasquatch are generally much bigger. Although this size is well within normal range for a female black bear (reference).

Bear cubs photographed in the same location less than 30 min prior - Bear cubs are generally accompanied by an adult bear.

Spinal flexion - The level and location of spinal flexion is not consistent with human, gorilla, or chimpanzee; but is consistent with a bear. See figure:

Gluteal muscles - It does not appear that this creature has pronounced gluteal muscles. Large gluteal muscles are associated with bipedal gait. Glutes appear similar to bear, although inconclusive due to picture quality.

Professional opinion - The Pennsylvania Game Commission declared this a "mangey bear" (reference). The bigfoot community argues that the Pennsylvania Game Commission is biased because they do not accept the possibility of a Sasquatch. Similarly, the Bigfoot community is biased because they do not accept the possibility that Sasquatch does not exist.

I feel the R Jacobs photos are most probably a bear and unlikely to be a Sasquatch. This might be an example of Bigfoot researchers drawing observations from conclusions.